Dismissed

Shri Amit Goyal v. State of U.P. and 7 Others

Allahabad HC28 Sept 2022A227/6668/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged orders dismissing his Section 156(3) application by converting it into a criminal complaint instead of directing investigation. Court held orders were well-reasoned and the dispute appeared civil in nature, finding no illegality and dismissing the petition.

What did the court decide?

Petition to set aside the orders dated 19.03.2021 and 12.05.2022 was dismissed.

Shri Amit Goyal Vs State of U.P. and 7 Others — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 89

¶2

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 6668 of 2022

¶3

Petitioner :- Shri Amit Goyal Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 7 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Yogendra Pal Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Yogendra Pal Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Jhamman Ram, learned AGA for the State and perused the record of the case.

¶6

The instant petition has been filed on behalf of the petitioner with the following prayer:-

¶7

"(i) Issue a order or direction for setting aside the impugned order dated 12.05.2022 passed by Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court no. 14 Meerut in Criminal Revision no.124 of 2021 (Amit Goyal Vs. State of U.P. and others).

¶8

(ii) Issue a order or direction for setting a aside the order dated 19.03.2021 passed by Special Chief Judicial Magistrate, Meerut in Misc. Case No. 171 of 2021, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, Police Station Partapur, District Meerut.

¶9

(iii) Issue any other order or direction as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case."

¶10

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner moved an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., which was treated by the court below as a criminal complaint vide order dated 19.03.2021 and when he challenged the order dated 19.03.2021 before the lower revisional court then on 12.05.2022, the lower revisional court dismissed the revision.

¶11

He further submitted that application moved by the petitioner under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. discloses prima facie cognizable offences under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC against the respondent nos. 2 to 8, therefore, the court below was under obligation to issue a direction under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. to register the case and investigate the matter but in spite of doing so court below treated the application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. moved by the petitioner as a criminal complaint, therefore, there is illegality in the order dated 19.03.2021. It is further submitted that the similar illegality has been committed by the lower revisional court.

¶12

Learned counsel further submitted that as private respondent

¶13

nos. 2 to 8 committed fraud by preparing forged will of the grand father of the petitioner and on the basis of that forged will they also mutated their name, therefore, it was necessary that an order for investigation should be passed and, therefore, both the orders dated 19.03.2021 & 12.05.2022 are illegal.

¶14

Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer and submitted that there is no illegality in the impugned orders dated 19.03.2022 & 12.05.2022. Both the orders are well reasoned order and court below after considering the entire facts arrived at the conclusion that there is no need to issue a direction to the police concerned to register the case and investigate the matter and therefore treated the application as a criminal complaint, thus the instant petition is liable to be dismissed.

¶15

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.

¶16

In this matter, petitioner is the complainant of the case and he moved an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. against the respondent nos. 2 to 8, which was treated by the court below as a criminal complaint vide order dated 19.03.2022 and when petitioner challenged the order dated 19.03.2022 before the Session court, then the Session court dismissed his revision vide order dated 12.05.2022.

¶17

The petitioner has only grievance that his application moved under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. was treated by the court below as a criminal complaint although in such case direction should be given under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. to register the case and to investigate the matter.

¶18

From the perusal of the impugned orders, it appears that both the orders are well reasoned and both the courts considered entire facts and arrived at the conclusion that there is no need to issue such direction to the police concerned. I find no illegality in the impugned orders. The present dispute appears to be civil in nature, therefore, I find no merit in the argument advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶19

Accordingly, the instant petition is dismissed .

¶20

Order Date :- 28.9.2022 Sanjeet

¶21

Digitally signed by SANJEET KUMAR YADAV Date: 2022.10.10 11:28:01 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shri Amit Goyal v. State of U.P. and 7 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri Amit Goyal v. State of U.P. and 7 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ashok Kumar Ahooja Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Sunil Kumar and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Munna Singh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Akshay Sharma Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Pramod Yadav and 2 Others Vs State of Uttar Pradesh through Secretary Home

Yashwant Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others